Citation Nr: 0723963
Decision Date: 08/02/07 Archive Date: 08/15/07
DOCKET NO. 04-26 214 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Denver,
Colorado
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to an increased evaluation for hepatitis C,
currently evaluated as 40 percent disabling.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Colorado Division of Veterans
Affairs
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
A. A. Booher, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active service from December 1980 to January
1996.
This appeal to the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) was
brought from actions taken by the above Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in June 2004.
During the course of the current appeal, the veteran has
raised a number of other issues. However, before the case
was received by the Board for the first time, he had made it
clear that he was withdrawing consideration thereon. Since
the case was previously before the Board, he has also again
raised the issue of entitlement to a total disability rating
for compensation based on individual unemployability, in the
context of his various disabilities becoming worse. This has
not been further addressed by the VARO, and is not part of
the current appellate review.
In June 2006, noting, in pertinent part, that there were new
regulations in effect for rating hepatitis, the case was
remanded by the Board for further development of the
evidence. This was accomplished; the VARO confirmed the
prior rating, prepared as SSOC, and the case was returned to
the Board.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management
Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the
appellant when further action is required.
REMAND
In February 2007, the veteran submitted a statement
indicating that he had no further evidence to submit. He
subsequently indicated that he was receiving ongoing care by
VA, from whom records might be available.
In a statement received in May 2007, the veteran specifically
requested the opportunity to provide testimony at a hearing
before the Board, asking that his VA up-dated clinical
records be acquired and available at the time of that
hearing. He also asked that "4 dates close together" be
assigned (presumably for the scheduled hearing although it
remains unclear why a multiple number was included, perhaps
as alternative dates) since he would have to obtain a ride
from someone else.
As to the veteran's request that additional medical records
be obtained for his hearing, the Board would note that
evidentiary development is not ordinarily done when remand
for a hearing is necessary. The veteran is free to secure
whatever evidence he would like to bring with him to his
Board hearing.
In view of the foregoing, the case is REMANDED for the
following action:
The veteran should
be scheduled for
hearing in
accordance with his
recent request. He
indicated that he
wished to have a
hearing before the
Board; in that
regard, the VARO
should clarify his
intent with regard
to whether he
desires a Travel
Board hearing, or a
videoconference
hearing.
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law
requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of
Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals
for Veterans Claims for additional development or other
appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.
See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007).
______________________________
ANDREW J. MULLEN
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a final decision
of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United
States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is
in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute
a final decision of the Board on the merits of the appeal.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2006).